2. Contact Info

3. Dealer Selection

We’ve reported longandfar the legal drama-bomb that is the Fisker and Tesla lawsuit. Now that the suit has been arbitrated in favor of Fisker, out comes the dirty little details in a 10-page PDF court document. In summary:

Sometime in 2006, Tesla, in effort to design the now-delayed (and renamed Model S) four-door WhiteStar hybrid, contracted multiple companies to help with design aesthetics. One such company was Fisker Automotive, a coachbuilder. A deal between the two was settled upon in January 2007, with Tesla planning to use “Designed by Fisker Coachbuild” as a marketing tool.

Fisker began work, unaware of Tesla’s desire to make the WhiteStar a PHEV, and pursued other projects with Quantum Fuel Systems Technologies Worldwide. In May the two companies developed the idea of a 4-door sports sedan, a 2-door sports coupe, a 2-door convertible, and a 4-door SUV, designed by Fisker and powered by Quantum technology.

Tesla went forward unaware of Fisker’s new partnership until July 31, when it discovered and investaged a financial “teaser” put forth by investors to gain funding for a Fisker-Quantum show car at the January 2008 Detroit Auto Show. Fisker was contacted for details and disclosed the relationship to Tesla, assuring there was no conflict of interest as Fisker was designing an $80,000 four-seater plug-in hybrid vehicle. For all Fisker knew, the Tesla’s $50,000 five-seater was to be all-electric.

On September 5, 2007, Tesla’s executive staff was internally informed that the Fisker-Quantum project “would not amount to much of anything” and that the venture with Fisker should go forward. Later that month, Tesla renegotiated its contract with Fisker.

After Quantum and Fisker announced they had received proper funding in late October and would proceed with the Detroit Auto Show project, Tesla cancelled its contract under CEO Elon Musk’s direction. On April 14, 2008, Tesla filed suit against Fisker, alleging fraud, breach of contract violation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, and unfair competition. Fisker and Tesla then entered arbitration.

After hearing testimony from witnesses and employees of both companies, arbitration ruled: “There was no evidence Fisker ever concealed its intentions to participate in the development of a PHEV with Quantum, or that it intended to become a manufacturer of a complete automobile.” Tesla had hired Fisker to do design work, not to manufacture a complete vehicle. Experts testified that designers undergo multiple projects for a variety of manufacturers and “there is no disclosure requirement absent a direct conflict.”

Also, Fisker was unaware of Tesla’s PHEV intentions and its “aversion to doing business with a company that was or might become a manufacturer.” When Tesla underwent renegotiations with Fisker, no mention or restrictions were made of Fisker’s PHEV development with Quantum. The document concludes: “Tesla’s assertions of violation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act by Fisker were baseless and neither brought nor pursued in good faith.” End story: Tesla now owes Fisker a whopping $1,144,385.03 for attorneys’ fees and costs.

And that about concludes this (hopefully last) chapter of Fisker’s and Tesla’s legal drama. Try and imagine end credits of a film: “The End” but with a question mark slowly fading in.